230 replies to this topic

[Wolfways]

I was watching the NGNG stream of the North American launch event and one thing stood out in the matches. LRM's were nearly nonexistent. LRM's need changed to be a viable weapon just like any other weapon system.
Imo, just like the long range of snipers in other fps games, players don't like LRM's mainly because they can hit you but you can't return fire. Indirect fire is really the problem.
So, here is my suggestion on how to make LRM's more viable and a little less hated...maybe

First the not so important stuff.

Range.
LRM's in TT had the same range of ERPPC's but in MWO you can only acquire your own targets out to 800m (I have no idea why) and fire on targets teammates have acquired up to 1000m (max weapon range).
Personally i'd like to see the LRM range increased to about 1500m, which is still less than an ERPPC. With the amount of cover on the maps and the slow missile travel time this would hardly make much difference imo and so isn't important. It's just something i'd like to see.

Warning incoming missiles.
While i find it (barely) acceptable that there's a warning i'd prefer that instead of a huge flashing sign appearing in the cockpit there was an alarm tone, maybe even a light indicator. Again, this isn't really important but just something i'd like.

Okay, now the important changes

Indirect fire.
Change LRM's so that the only way they can fire indirect is if the target is affected by TAG or NARC. Not only does this stop the first seen enemy mech becoming the target of a barrage of missiles but it also creates a synergy between the LRM using mech and the light pilot who wants to play more of a scout role.

Direct fire.
Because the LRM mech has to first acquire a lock and then guide the missiles during the whole flight time this makes the firing mech virtually defenseless as it can't torso twist to spread incoming damage from another enemy or even return fire without losing the lock on the previous target and wasting its ammo.
Make LRM's fire and forget. The firer has to still get the lock first but after that the missiles will track the target by themselves.

ECM.
ECM is not supposed to stop missiles from locking on. This "feature" needs to be removed.
In PUGs you can't count on teammates to use TAG/NARC and forcing an LRM mech like the Catapult to give up one of its few energy slots which it needs for defense is ridiculous. Not only that but it further reduces the LRM's range to 750m.
The Catapult-A1 can't even equip a TAG!
TAG should be an option to increase the effectiveness of LRM's, like Artemis, not a requirement in case enemy mechs have a piece of equipment that renders your weapons completely useless.
Another option is to change the way LRM's acquire a lock. What if instead of needing to target a mech (which ECM negates) before trying to get the lock LRM's could lock on to any enemy mech within missile range that the player holds the crosshairs over then there would be no need to change the ECM (Although i'm guessing that it would be easier to change how ECM works). As far as i know ECM counters Artemis IV, C3, and NARC, so it should stop players from targeting (and getting info about) enemy under the ECM bubble, but in TT LRM's didn't need the C3 to lock on to enemy mechs anyway, so the second option actually makes more sense.
ECM was meant as a counter to the advanced technology, not to the actual weapons themselves.

[RandomLurker]

Fixing ECM would almost completely fix LRMs as well, IMO. There's some tweaks I'd like, but for the most part they are minor. It's ECM proliferation that's killed the entire weapon line.

Range: I'm ok with the range as is. Limiting target range to 800m gives incentive to team play. It'd be nice to see Artemis extend the firing range to 1200m though, since it only gives limited benefits atm due to the line of sight limitation.

Indirect Fire: I'm actually ok with being able to shoot at teammates mechs. A tracking penalty for indirect fire would be good though.

Requiring TAG or NARC makes LRM's completely unappealing for general usage, since you can't rely on anyone having those. Also, they both suck. TAG requires too much exposure to use and NARC gets blown off too easily. TAG I can see leaving as is, making it a competition weapon. NARC is just bad.

Travel Time: Missiles should be sped up 25 to 50%. Time to target at max range is just abominable, and the ywill almost never hit if the target isn't stupid. (incoming missile warning toned down could help). Some mech's can even outrun LRMs in a straight line race, which is ludicrous.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Signed

[Kitane]

1) Fix ECM. Remove this ******** {Scrap} that gives immunity from target locks and missiles and replace it with proper ECM that counters Artemis, NARC and additional range bonus of BAP.

2) Nerf Incoming missile warning. Make it part of AMS module and restrict the maximum range it can detect incoming missiles to ~400m


Really, most problems with LRMs are caused by fantasy Piranha ECM module some designer put together after getting thoroughly violated by LRM boats.

Edited by Kitane, 27 September 2013 - 11:05 PM.

[General Taskeen]

Basically those idea's have been stated in some format or other. I wish PGI would revamp all of that - but will they... is the real question.

[Wolfways]

General Taskeen, on 27 September 2013 - 11:12 PM, said:

Basically those idea's have been stated in some format or other. I wish PGI would revamp all of that - but will they... is the real question.

I doubt they will change things...but i'm not the kind who gives up easily

[Tincan Nightmare]

The biggest problem with LRM's is the indirect fire ability. Back in closed beta there was a time when it turned into trench warfare, with both teams running with large numbers of LRM's and just waiting for that red box to appear on a target. This led to numerous 'fixes' and is what caused the current state of affairs with ECM (at least in my opinion). Even now, sometimes in a PUG match you will see a team catch someone outside of ECM and just rain a shower of LRM's on them. Making it so that you can only lock and fire LRM's if the target is in your line of sight (or a teammate is targeting them with TAG or NARC) would allow more options to enhance LRM's so they are a better (and more used) weapon, such as increasing speed, allowing them to lock on regardless of ECM, and making them fire and forget (though maybe requiring a new lock after each shot). Any changes to make LRM's more powerful while maintaining indirect fire ability, however, will make people run around screaming its OP and/or that the sky (in game) is falling.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Here's to hoping PGI drops their **** vision of howthey think LRMs should work, and go with with DOES work.

[Fajther]

From the cb on to today it seems as though pgi has wanted lrms and ssrms to be first order optimal strategies. (noob weapons that introduce people to the game.) That is where they are good. In pug matches they are quite good. I believe that is where they should stay. LRM+art get me decent numbers in pub games. Just call it a niche weapon, if that makes you feel better. LRMs are quite good as they are. As a side note, when ever they mess with them it usually involves months of balance problems. It is better to leave them as they are.

[Rasc4l]

I support this thread. Hope PGI reads OP's suggestions, which are great.

EDIT: Here's a link to my suggestion, which in addition to LRMs, covers much of information warfare:

http://mwomercs.com/...are-your-input/

Edited by Rasc4l, 06 October 2013 - 09:09 AM.

[Birkow]

I support this idea, but we should not cheat ourselves- we all are on island and PGI will not listen to us.

[Wolfways]

Fajther, on 28 September 2013 - 02:20 AM, said:

From the cb on to today it seems as though pgi has wanted lrms and ssrms to be first order optimal strategies. (noob weapons that introduce people to the game.) That is where they are good. In pug matches they are quite good. I believe that is where they should stay. LRM+art get me decent numbers in pub games. Just call it a niche weapon, if that makes you feel better. LRMs are quite good as they are. As a side note, when ever they mess with them it usually involves months of balance problems. It is better to leave them as they are.

I don't agree that they are good in pug matches as noone keeps an enemy targeted (assuming they target at all) so getting missiles to hit a target through indirect fire isn't easy unless the target is away from cover while brawling, and you need to stay facing the enemy when using missiles in direct fire which makes you an easy target (especially if you're piloting a Catapult). But tbh i'd be happy with indirect fire removed if they made LRM's more viable for direct fire, but that would take away one of the reasons to play a scout.
The way LRM's are now unless you only want to use them as direct fire weapons you need to bring much more ammo as many will be hitting the ground when teammates lose the target.
Also, LRM's are just one of the various weapons used by stock mechs. Why should they be a niche weapon?
I'd rather PGI messed them up for another year trying to get the right balance than leave them unused by competitive players.

[East Indy]

There are a lot of potential solutions, and the OP's are worth trying out in a test environment, too.

I particularly like the fire-and-forget aspect, since (I say this as a target) line-of-sight is the easy way out for avoiding a volley.

The only tweak I'd make is a slower lock-on for indirect without NARC or TAG (100% to 200% slower) rather than none at all.

[King Picollo]

Faster missile speed would probably do it, they're pretty easy to evade at long range due to the travel time.

[Wolfways]

East Indy, on 28 September 2013 - 02:55 AM, said:

The only tweak I'd make is a slower lock-on for indirect without NARC or TAG (100% to 200% slower) rather than none at all.

I suggested the no lock unless with TAG or NARC because even increasing the lock-on time would still result in every LRM on the team flying towards the same unlucky first enemy mech seen by a friendly mech.
Of course the same thing could happen if that friendly mech happened to be a scout using TAG/NARC but it would be a lot less common.
Plus i thought it might make the idea more acceptable.

[Kuritaclan]

King Picollo, on 28 September 2013 - 03:07 AM, said:

Faster missile speed would probably do it, they're pretty easy to evade at long range due to the travel time.

This is the meaning behind it - Otherwise the Tip: "You could hide behind environment to evade fire" wouldn't make any sense.

[Livewyr]

LRMs are fine (Aside from CT seeking and the need for an anti-boating mechanic other than ghost heat)

ECM is the problem...

[Kaijin]

I doubt missiles will be faster, although they should be.

From a previous Ask The Devs:
Q: Modern-day missiles of similar size and function travel between 400-800 kph. Aerospace fighters at the present point in the timeline mount LRMs and fire them at each other with success, but oddly, in MWO a light mech can outrun them completely, and even a mech travelling at 80 kph can dodge some of them simply by moving away from incoming missiles. [Kaijin]
A: BattleTech/MechWarrior do not follow 'real life' rules for many reasons, one of which is that Mechs don't actually make sense as a combat vehicle. Beyond that though, a lot of these choices are for balance, playability, etc. If this game worked like real life you'd be dying to artillery 10 kilometres away, and ships in orbit would just drop rocks on you, nuking entire areas. So basically, it'd be less fun [Garth]
http://mwomercs.com/...evs-26-answers/

Edited by Kaijin, 28 September 2013 - 03:32 AM.

[Duncan Jr Fischer]

I do not agree in full with the proposed changes. I think the current LRMs implementation is not the best, but quite good and pretty balanced. The efficiency of LRMs overall in battle is just about what they are in TT. It's a support weapon. It was never as viable weapon than lasers or ACs or anything. But it's a good support weapon. In TT they have a very precise distance at which they are super-effective, and one step closer they stop doing damage, one step further they are less accurate.
I can say I'm content with their current state.

Self-guided fire-and-forget LRMs would be a HELL, as they were in MW3. They should be less accurate, that's for sure.
Killing indirect fire is also a mistake. Binding it to terrible TAG or NARC in their current state is a torture to everyone.
I say again, imo LRMs now are in a fairly good state. Better not to touch what is good enough - it may get worse.

[Wispsy]

There was a time when you could literally melt an Atlas in under 5 seconds with LRMs. Guess what, nobody used them competitively even then. LRMs are fine in pugs right now, I see them do well if played well and omg are they annoying to me. However, they will never be used in truly competitive play. It is just not possible to make it happen. Honestly, it really cannot be done. They have travel time. This means they will be avoided by expert players almost every single time no matter how much you buff them. No joke, the changes you suggest would indeed make them exceedingly strong in pugs, but people would still not use them competitively. I am not sure how else to put this really...unless you turn them into teleporting missiles which would be completely pointless then they are never going to be competitive viable. If for some reason they ever do become, they will be so strong that they are the only weapon ever used by any1 in any game.

Edited by Wispsy, 28 September 2013 - 03:54 AM.